Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Why did Hoffa/Hall sell us out
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PiedmontSteward" data-source="post: 1197898" data-attributes="member: 42270"><p>The new 9.5 language that requires arbitration when the driver's planned day does not get adjusted and gets our foot in the door as far as requiring the company to put more FT drivers on the road. It's not perfect, but it can be built upon. We will never see "solid" harassment language that has real teeth, such as requiring a supervisor or manager be moved or terminated; when I help union members file Art. 37, Sec. 1 grievances I always have them add "for [supervisor] to be reprimanded and for grievant to be made whole in every way." When supervisors (at least in the hub) start get jammed up with multiple harassment grievances (from multiple employees) and get the hotline called on them, the labor manager will typically shuffle them around the operation to prevent the possibility of litigation. </p><p></p><p>As far as more 22.3 jobs, I wanted new language in the contract protecting the jobs from being moved away to other locals. But other than an increase each contract, I don't see IBT pushing for those since so many 22.3 combo workers <strong>don't even work their second shift</strong>. Why push for a FT job with a FT pension and pay when they become a de facto 20-hour a week gig (at $26/hr) because the hub hourlies don't want to work? It might be a good idea to push for new language in the supplements allowing 22.3's to opt-out of their FT assignments and go back to being PT or require a FT combo's job going back up for bid if they don't work their second shift 50% of the time or more (unless they are laid off or have a valid medical reason.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PiedmontSteward, post: 1197898, member: 42270"] The new 9.5 language that requires arbitration when the driver's planned day does not get adjusted and gets our foot in the door as far as requiring the company to put more FT drivers on the road. It's not perfect, but it can be built upon. We will never see "solid" harassment language that has real teeth, such as requiring a supervisor or manager be moved or terminated; when I help union members file Art. 37, Sec. 1 grievances I always have them add "for [supervisor] to be reprimanded and for grievant to be made whole in every way." When supervisors (at least in the hub) start get jammed up with multiple harassment grievances (from multiple employees) and get the hotline called on them, the labor manager will typically shuffle them around the operation to prevent the possibility of litigation. As far as more 22.3 jobs, I wanted new language in the contract protecting the jobs from being moved away to other locals. But other than an increase each contract, I don't see IBT pushing for those since so many 22.3 combo workers [B]don't even work their second shift[/B]. Why push for a FT job with a FT pension and pay when they become a de facto 20-hour a week gig (at $26/hr) because the hub hourlies don't want to work? It might be a good idea to push for new language in the supplements allowing 22.3's to opt-out of their FT assignments and go back to being PT or require a FT combo's job going back up for bid if they don't work their second shift 50% of the time or more (unless they are laid off or have a valid medical reason.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Why did Hoffa/Hall sell us out
Top